Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!infotel!pollux!ti-csl!herman
From: herman@ti-csl.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: Minix and compiler models
Message-ID: <13647@ti-csl.CSNET>
Date: Thu, 5-Feb-87 15:17:04 EST
Article-I.D.: ti-csl.13647
Posted: Thu Feb  5 15:17:04 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Feb-87 16:16:28 EST
References: <383@dayton.UUCP>
Organization: TI Computer Science Center, Dallas
Lines: 24

in article <383@dayton.UUCP>, joe@dayton.UUCP (Joseph P. Larson) says:
> I always thought stacks grew up.  I think (and hope!) that you've got the
> two reversed!  ("Where, or where have the standards gone?  Where, oh where
> may they be?")
> -- 
> UUCP: ihnp4!rosevax!dayton!joe          Joe Larson
> ATT : (612) 375-3537                    Dayton Hudson Department Store Company
> (standard disclaimer...)                700 on the Mall
>                                         Mpls, Mn. 55408

Sorry, but stacks in general grow downwards in memory.  Just look at the
description of the PUSH and POP instructions on various processors.  They
usually pre-decrement the stack pointer on PUSH, and post-increment on POP.

Memory management units, or processors with memory management facilities
on board, usually provide a special segment type for segments that grow
downwards in memory, just for stack applications (see Expand Down or ED bit
on the 80286, or the Expansion Direction bit on the PDP11/45).

-- 
Herman Schuurman 	ARPA:  herman%TI-CSL@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Texas Instruments Inc.	CSNET: herman@TI-CSL
PO Box 226015 M/S 238	USENET: {ut-sally,convex!smu,texsun,rice}!ti-csl!herman
Dallas, Texas 75266	VOICE: (214) 995-0845